Speaking for myself, not bugging me.
Yes I was afraid that the room layout wasn't alterable.
Right, so for THX levels, you want a minimum of 105dB @ 1W/1m for each speaker without exceeding xmax, which means that the voice coil always stays inside the magnetic gap.
Now let's say your speakers are 90dB in sensitivity. You need to double power every time you want a 3dB increase, so for 105dB you'll need about 32W from your receiver. But you want some headroom in the receiver too so the minimum you'd need would be about 64W. (let me know if that isn't clear)
Now with your raw drivers, sensitivity is about 90db for both of them. However when you put them in a box, you lose about 6dB in the lower frequencies (called baffle step loss) as the sound will be spreading out both in front of and behind the speaker. So if you just went with a 2-way speaker, it's sensitivity would only be about 84dB (the tweeter would need to be padded down to match that level too). Now you are going to need 256W to reach that same 105dB + 3dB of headroom and neither driver by itself is going to be happy with that. This is why I'm suggesting multiple drivers. When you run 2 drivers in parallel, you gain 6dB which covers for the 6dB baffle step loss and you are back at a 90dB sensitivity speaker. Impedance however is halved which was why I was asking about the specs of your dad's receiver. But we can still maintain an 8ohm speaker if you want by using 4 woofers in a series/parallel wiring where we again gain 6dB but the impedance stays at 8ohms. You'll also have 4 times the power handling capacity as a single woofer in this last situation.
Btw, you can gain another 6dB of sensitivity by avoiding baffle step loss completely by going with in-wall speakers or in your case building a false wall flush with your fronts. In this case, you'd end up with speaker sensitivity of 96dB which now doesn't really require that much from an amplifier does it? But you'd have to (at least) double up your tweeters too to make this work which may have its own set of little problems, just to be clear. Speaker building is all about trade-offs.
You are correct that the same speakers all the way around are said to be the best case scenario. If you can manage this then that's great. However, where this is most important is in the mid and high frequencies. So frequently if people are using 3-ways up front, they will just use the same tweeter and mid (ported) in the surrounds where the speakers aren't quite so important as the fronts. Frequently there also isn't enough room for the big floorstanders that are used in the front to be used at the back too. But again to insure high enough SPL's, doubling up the woofer in an MTM or TMM for the surround would be a good idea too.
So if you used the Peerless as a woofer, I was thinking of WMTMW for the FR, FL and CC and MTM as your surrounds. Plus 2 subs.
If you used the Seas as both mid and woofer, I was thinking WWMTMWW for FR, FL and CC with something smaller at the back like MTM, TMWW or WMTMW depending on space (actually, these surrounds would work in the above scenario too). Possibly MTTM or some variant if the surrounds are wall mounted and don't require much baffle step compensation if at all. Plus subs.
Now if you really wanted to go over the top, you could use 4 each of the mids and tweeters which would be like a small line array which would mean even less being asked from each driver and therefore a little cleaner output from each. And when SPL's are way up there, you won't be running into any sort of compression or lack of dynamic range when the speakers are asked to play just a little louder. But to be clear again, I'm not 100% sure if this kind of design requires some extra trickery in the xo so input more knowledgeable than mine would be required.
Now in terms of the tweeter, think of it as perhaps having the easiest job. You simply don't need a large diaphragm or lots of excursion for the highest frequencies. So if the tweeter is also at 90dB sensitivity then 64W will also result in 105dB so it will have no problem keeping up with all those mids as long as it's the kind of tweeter that can handle that kind of power. Looking at your specific tweeter it's rated for 90W of continuous power and peaks of 220W. So a single tweeter should work well. But if you wanted to use more than 1, well that's just icing on the cake.
Make sense?
Yes I was afraid that the room layout wasn't alterable.
Right, so for THX levels, you want a minimum of 105dB @ 1W/1m for each speaker without exceeding xmax, which means that the voice coil always stays inside the magnetic gap.
Now let's say your speakers are 90dB in sensitivity. You need to double power every time you want a 3dB increase, so for 105dB you'll need about 32W from your receiver. But you want some headroom in the receiver too so the minimum you'd need would be about 64W. (let me know if that isn't clear)
Now with your raw drivers, sensitivity is about 90db for both of them. However when you put them in a box, you lose about 6dB in the lower frequencies (called baffle step loss) as the sound will be spreading out both in front of and behind the speaker. So if you just went with a 2-way speaker, it's sensitivity would only be about 84dB (the tweeter would need to be padded down to match that level too). Now you are going to need 256W to reach that same 105dB + 3dB of headroom and neither driver by itself is going to be happy with that. This is why I'm suggesting multiple drivers. When you run 2 drivers in parallel, you gain 6dB which covers for the 6dB baffle step loss and you are back at a 90dB sensitivity speaker. Impedance however is halved which was why I was asking about the specs of your dad's receiver. But we can still maintain an 8ohm speaker if you want by using 4 woofers in a series/parallel wiring where we again gain 6dB but the impedance stays at 8ohms. You'll also have 4 times the power handling capacity as a single woofer in this last situation.
Btw, you can gain another 6dB of sensitivity by avoiding baffle step loss completely by going with in-wall speakers or in your case building a false wall flush with your fronts. In this case, you'd end up with speaker sensitivity of 96dB which now doesn't really require that much from an amplifier does it? But you'd have to (at least) double up your tweeters too to make this work which may have its own set of little problems, just to be clear. Speaker building is all about trade-offs.
You are correct that the same speakers all the way around are said to be the best case scenario. If you can manage this then that's great. However, where this is most important is in the mid and high frequencies. So frequently if people are using 3-ways up front, they will just use the same tweeter and mid (ported) in the surrounds where the speakers aren't quite so important as the fronts. Frequently there also isn't enough room for the big floorstanders that are used in the front to be used at the back too. But again to insure high enough SPL's, doubling up the woofer in an MTM or TMM for the surround would be a good idea too.
So if you used the Peerless as a woofer, I was thinking of WMTMW for the FR, FL and CC and MTM as your surrounds. Plus 2 subs.
If you used the Seas as both mid and woofer, I was thinking WWMTMWW for FR, FL and CC with something smaller at the back like MTM, TMWW or WMTMW depending on space (actually, these surrounds would work in the above scenario too). Possibly MTTM or some variant if the surrounds are wall mounted and don't require much baffle step compensation if at all. Plus subs.
Now if you really wanted to go over the top, you could use 4 each of the mids and tweeters which would be like a small line array which would mean even less being asked from each driver and therefore a little cleaner output from each. And when SPL's are way up there, you won't be running into any sort of compression or lack of dynamic range when the speakers are asked to play just a little louder. But to be clear again, I'm not 100% sure if this kind of design requires some extra trickery in the xo so input more knowledgeable than mine would be required.
Now in terms of the tweeter, think of it as perhaps having the easiest job. You simply don't need a large diaphragm or lots of excursion for the highest frequencies. So if the tweeter is also at 90dB sensitivity then 64W will also result in 105dB so it will have no problem keeping up with all those mids as long as it's the kind of tweeter that can handle that kind of power. Looking at your specific tweeter it's rated for 90W of continuous power and peaks of 220W. So a single tweeter should work well. But if you wanted to use more than 1, well that's just icing on the cake.
Make sense?
Some silicon on the rubber ring, stretching it to it's limits both ways for a minute or two, and the Fs drops down to 55, from 90, so that's better
It's not silicon. It's silicone. Just sayin'...
Never built an wmtmwww, as it goes. I expect I could, but do I care?
Attachments
I was typing on my phone and it has a stupid autocorrect that takes offense at basic words sometimes, I missed the change sorry
That makes a lot of sense, will have to suss out how many of the Peerless I have. And the size I can fit in the surrounds.
With a construction like this, the mids and the woofers share a common enclosure that is vented? I have done a bit of reading of MJK's work on TL, and have his sheets, I haven't really looked much at basic ported enclosures.
You've been a lot of help thank you, things are slowly clearing up in my mind
That makes a lot of sense, will have to suss out how many of the Peerless I have. And the size I can fit in the surrounds.
With a construction like this, the mids and the woofers share a common enclosure that is vented? I have done a bit of reading of MJK's work on TL, and have his sheets, I haven't really looked much at basic ported enclosures.
You've been a lot of help thank you, things are slowly clearing up in my mind
No, woofers and mids always need their own enclosure. Whether sealed or ported depends on the drivers and what frequencies each driver is trying to reproduce.
In general, a sealed enclosure will sound better than a ported one, quality-wise but a ported one will dig deeper. For the mids since you don't need them to dig deep, go sealed. If the Peerless are the woofers, also go sealed since they should go low enough for at least a 80Hz xo that way. If the woofers are the Seas, go ported as they will need that to get that low although that may depend on which set of TS parameters you go with. Measured ones are best but you have to make sure they are accurate and the drivers are well broken in.
I even think subdividing the Seas woofer enclosures into 2 x 2 woofers is a good idea. This way it gives you some tuning flexibility by being able to plug just one port if the bass sounds a little overdone.
Oh absolutely but it's not as finicky as the vented volume and port size relationship. Download one of those box programs I linked to and have a play at changing some numbers around. It's an excellent way to learn. Personally I prefer Unibox but it needs Excel and for Excel to be working properly.
As I mentioned before, if you're trying to decide between the Peerless and the Seas for the woofer, you may want to try to compare how they sound above 80Hz and/or measure them and look at the FR, distortion and cone resonances. Having someone to help you with this could be a real bonus.
As I mentioned before, if you're trying to decide between the Peerless and the Seas for the woofer, you may want to try to compare how they sound above 80Hz and/or measure them and look at the FR, distortion and cone resonances. Having someone to help you with this could be a real bonus.
Yeah, I'm waiting on word about how many Peerless I have to play with. And am hoping in the next month or two to actually buy myself a MiniDSP UMIK-1 so I can measure FRD myself.
OK, re-measured the woofer after loosening it all up a bit, putting silicone on the rubber, stretching it, blasting a sinewave at good volume from between 35-90hz and these are the remeasured TSP
Qms = 1.637
Qes = 0.537
Qts = 0.404
Cms = 855.0944 um/N
Sd = 120cm^2
Mmr = 0.7631gr
Mmd = 12.0941gr
Mms = 12.8571gr
Vas = 17.7081lt
BL = 6.744T*m
Ref eff = 0.352%
SPL = 87.61dB/W/m
EBP = 89.37
Re = 6.3
Le = 0.732mH
Fs = 48Hz
Qms = 1.637
Qes = 0.537
Qts = 0.404
Cms = 855.0944 um/N
Sd = 120cm^2
Mmr = 0.7631gr
Mmd = 12.0941gr
Mms = 12.8571gr
Vas = 17.7081lt
BL = 6.744T*m
Ref eff = 0.352%
SPL = 87.61dB/W/m
EBP = 89.37
Re = 6.3
Le = 0.732mH
Fs = 48Hz
Andrew, I think you lack a plan here. 6.5" SEAS polycone and SEAS 27TFF ought not to be too hard.
You've already seen a couple of likely crossovers.
Your own Joe Rasmussen is quite experienced at the bassy 2.5 way variations, and MTM is just a simple maths conversion on the MT filter values.
Does something along Elsinore lines appeal?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/97043-elsinore-project-thread.html
Joe is a very cool guy. He has original ideas which stand the test of listening:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/285062-joe-rasmussen-usher-s520-current-compatible-crossover.html
You've already seen a couple of likely crossovers.
Your own Joe Rasmussen is quite experienced at the bassy 2.5 way variations, and MTM is just a simple maths conversion on the MT filter values.
Does something along Elsinore lines appeal?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/97043-elsinore-project-thread.html
Joe is a very cool guy. He has original ideas which stand the test of listening:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/285062-joe-rasmussen-usher-s520-current-compatible-crossover.html
There are enough of the Peerless that I can use them as woofers if they sound alright up in the higher ranger. So I'll have a look at a MTMWW for the FL, FR, WMTMW for the centre, and the surrounds as either a MTM, or maybe Chuck in am extra one or two SEAS to reinforce the bass if there's the space (will have to pay Dad a visit and see).
Thanks for the link to the Elsinore Project, his information on XO's is eye-opening. Will definitely be keeping those thoughts in my mind as I go ahead.
I am sitting on the fence as far as passive vs. active XO's go. There are limitless number of electronics wizzes at the Hackerspace who can solder me up anything I ask them to, so...
Thanks for the link to the Elsinore Project, his information on XO's is eye-opening. Will definitely be keeping those thoughts in my mind as I go ahead.
I am sitting on the fence as far as passive vs. active XO's go. There are limitless number of electronics wizzes at the Hackerspace who can solder me up anything I ask them to, so...
This looks like it's probably pretty close to the model I have, I can't find the manufacturers specs on the model, I know it was made prior to 2004, but other than that... Looking at the provided frequency response, It starts to roll off below 80hz, and has a hump just above 400hz, so I can probably work with that as a woofer in the main speakers. I don't have anything to measure frequency atm, but to my ear it sounds reasonable in the range I'm interested in. Will investigate subwoofer options.
Yes, there is a lot of good information in the Elsinore write up. Same type of 2.5-way design as the Uluwatu but with 2 less drivers. You can indeed choose to go with 2.5-way design. The advantage of the 3-way means that the mids will be cleaner - they won't have to also be producing the LF at the same time. I expect one would notice the difference if it is just a TMM whereas it will probably just be a small improvement if the LF are distributed over multiple drivers like a TMMMM like the Elsinore or a TMMMMMM like the Uluwatu.
This older Peerless XLS, View attachment 527498 , might be closer to what you have but you are definitely going to have to measure the FR too. The specs look better on the Seas this time but you should perhaps work in more than a few of each driver, measure them and then take the averages. Consistency is going to be important when using multiple drivers.
Using those latest TS parameters, here's exactly how the Seas stacks up. In all cases except where noted, max SPL is at 1m and is determined by excursion limits (xmax). All sims are done in Unibox.
Sealed
Single Driver (good for a 2-way for music but still needs a sub)
Vb = 7L
Q = .708
F3 = 87Hz
max SPL before bsc = 97.5dB
max SPL after bsc = 91.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
Z (impedance) = 8ohm
Two Drivers in Parallel (better for a 2-way for music in a larger room but still needs a sub)
Vb = 14L
Q = .708
F3 = 87Hz
max SPL before bsc = 103.5dB
max SPL after bsc = 97.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
Z (impedance) = 4ohm
Single Driver with 2nd order HP xo @ 300Hz (excellent choice for the mid in a 3-way)
xmax is not exceeded even at the drivers power limits of 250W, so
max SPL before bsc = 111.5dB
max SPL after bsc = not relevant since the mid will operate above the baffle step loss frequency
Power req'd = 250W
Two Drivers in Parallel with 2nd order HP xo @ 300Hz (a bit of overkill actually for the mid in a 3-way)
max SPL before bsc = 117.5dB
Power req'd = 250W
Ported
Single Driver (good for a 2-way with music, no sub; good choice for movies with a sub but below THX SPL levels)
Vb = 17L
Fb = 45Hz
F3 = 43Hz
Port = 5cm x 16cm
max SPL for content above 40Hz before bsc = 97.5dB
max SPL for content above 40Hz after bsc = 91.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo before bsc = 105.5dB
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo after bsc = 99.5dB
Power req'd = 60W
Z = 8ohm
Two Drivers in Parallel (excellent for a 2-way for music, no sub; excellent for movies with a sub; meets THX levels)
Vb = 34L
Fb = 45Hz
F3 = 43Hz
Port = 2 x (5cm x 16cm) or 6cm x 12cm
max SPL for content above 40Hz before bsc = 103.5dB
max SPL for content above 40Hz after bsc = 97.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo before bsc = 111.5dB
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo after bsc = 105.5dB
Power req'd = 60W
Z = 4ohm
Four Drivers in Parallel/Series (outstanding for 2-way music no sub in a large room; more than enough for movies with a sub at THX levels with headroom left to burn)
Vb = 68L
Fb = 45Hz
F3 = 43Hz
Port = 4 x (5cm x 16cm) or 9cm x 13cm
max SPL for content above 40Hz before bsc = 109.5dB
max SPL for content above 40Hz after bsc = 103.5dB
Power req'd = 40W
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo before bsc = 117.5dB
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo after bsc = 111.5dB
Power req'd = 240W
Power req'd for 105.5dB after bsc = 60W
Z = 8ohm
And for the Peerless XLS (just a ball park as I'm using the specs from my link above)
Single Driver Sealed with an 80Hz HP xo (excellent for the woofer in a 3-way for music/movies if quality and FR are there; needs a sub)
Vb = 8L
max SPL before bsc = >124dB
Power req'd = >6000W
Z = 4ohm
Single Driver Ported (F3 is actually a little low; port is rather long; may be better with passive radiator(s) and or with some boost on the lowest frequencies; and you'll need a 2nd one to hit THX levels)
Vb = 21L
Fb = 35Hz
F3 = 35Hz
Port = 7.5cm x 51cm
max SPL = 106.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
Z = 4ohm
Conclusions?
With the Seas as the woofers, a 2.5-way TMM would be adequate. A 3-way TMWW would be better. A TMWWWW sweeter still. Doubling up the mid is unnecessary. TMM would be the minimum for the surrounds.
With the Peerless as the woofers a TMW should be more than adequate. Your choice on surrounds.
The new receiver should have a high current amp with a minimum of 120W when we take bsc into account for every speaker. More power will give you greater than just 3dB of headroom at peaks of 105dB.
Here's keeping my fingers crossed that I transcribed everything accurately.
This older Peerless XLS, View attachment 527498 , might be closer to what you have but you are definitely going to have to measure the FR too. The specs look better on the Seas this time but you should perhaps work in more than a few of each driver, measure them and then take the averages. Consistency is going to be important when using multiple drivers.
Using those latest TS parameters, here's exactly how the Seas stacks up. In all cases except where noted, max SPL is at 1m and is determined by excursion limits (xmax). All sims are done in Unibox.
Sealed
Single Driver (good for a 2-way for music but still needs a sub)
Vb = 7L
Q = .708
F3 = 87Hz
max SPL before bsc = 97.5dB
max SPL after bsc = 91.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
Z (impedance) = 8ohm
Two Drivers in Parallel (better for a 2-way for music in a larger room but still needs a sub)
Vb = 14L
Q = .708
F3 = 87Hz
max SPL before bsc = 103.5dB
max SPL after bsc = 97.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
Z (impedance) = 4ohm
Single Driver with 2nd order HP xo @ 300Hz (excellent choice for the mid in a 3-way)
xmax is not exceeded even at the drivers power limits of 250W, so
max SPL before bsc = 111.5dB
max SPL after bsc = not relevant since the mid will operate above the baffle step loss frequency
Power req'd = 250W
Two Drivers in Parallel with 2nd order HP xo @ 300Hz (a bit of overkill actually for the mid in a 3-way)
max SPL before bsc = 117.5dB
Power req'd = 250W
Ported
Single Driver (good for a 2-way with music, no sub; good choice for movies with a sub but below THX SPL levels)
Vb = 17L
Fb = 45Hz
F3 = 43Hz
Port = 5cm x 16cm
max SPL for content above 40Hz before bsc = 97.5dB
max SPL for content above 40Hz after bsc = 91.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo before bsc = 105.5dB
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo after bsc = 99.5dB
Power req'd = 60W
Z = 8ohm
Two Drivers in Parallel (excellent for a 2-way for music, no sub; excellent for movies with a sub; meets THX levels)
Vb = 34L
Fb = 45Hz
F3 = 43Hz
Port = 2 x (5cm x 16cm) or 6cm x 12cm
max SPL for content above 40Hz before bsc = 103.5dB
max SPL for content above 40Hz after bsc = 97.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo before bsc = 111.5dB
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo after bsc = 105.5dB
Power req'd = 60W
Z = 4ohm
Four Drivers in Parallel/Series (outstanding for 2-way music no sub in a large room; more than enough for movies with a sub at THX levels with headroom left to burn)
Vb = 68L
Fb = 45Hz
F3 = 43Hz
Port = 4 x (5cm x 16cm) or 9cm x 13cm
max SPL for content above 40Hz before bsc = 109.5dB
max SPL for content above 40Hz after bsc = 103.5dB
Power req'd = 40W
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo before bsc = 117.5dB
max SPL with an 80Hz HP xo after bsc = 111.5dB
Power req'd = 240W
Power req'd for 105.5dB after bsc = 60W
Z = 8ohm
And for the Peerless XLS (just a ball park as I'm using the specs from my link above)
Single Driver Sealed with an 80Hz HP xo (excellent for the woofer in a 3-way for music/movies if quality and FR are there; needs a sub)
Vb = 8L
max SPL before bsc = >124dB
Power req'd = >6000W
Z = 4ohm
Single Driver Ported (F3 is actually a little low; port is rather long; may be better with passive radiator(s) and or with some boost on the lowest frequencies; and you'll need a 2nd one to hit THX levels)
Vb = 21L
Fb = 35Hz
F3 = 35Hz
Port = 7.5cm x 51cm
max SPL = 106.5dB
Power req'd = 10W
Z = 4ohm
Conclusions?
With the Seas as the woofers, a 2.5-way TMM would be adequate. A 3-way TMWW would be better. A TMWWWW sweeter still. Doubling up the mid is unnecessary. TMM would be the minimum for the surrounds.
With the Peerless as the woofers a TMW should be more than adequate. Your choice on surrounds.
The new receiver should have a high current amp with a minimum of 120W when we take bsc into account for every speaker. More power will give you greater than just 3dB of headroom at peaks of 105dB.
Here's keeping my fingers crossed that I transcribed everything accurately.
I'll try again. Looks like it should work this time.
No typo on the sub! When you use it as a woofer with a 2nd order filter at 80Hz, you're not really asking it to do very much. In this situation, it's going to be limited by the amount of power it can handle not by excursion limits (I don't actually think it can handle 6000W, the attached pdf doesn't specify) . If you let it play down as low as it will go in a sealed box, it'll hit 115dB with 640W and still stay under xmax. There isn't really much point though because it doesn't go very low sealed - F3 is only 78Hz. Your drivers may or may not do the exact same thing. In other words for a sub, you have to go ported or some similar LF enhancing variation. But for a woofer in a 3-way for movies, it will have more headroom than you are ever going to need. I guess 1 negative to that design though is that if you wanted to play it for music only without a sub, it will be less than satisfactory.
I did however just notice 1 typo. The Peerless ported or sealed needs 100W to hit the 106dB not 10W. And that will mean you'll need more power in your AVR to drive it in a 3-way than just 120W. You'll need 200W for 3dB of headroom and 400W for 6dB. And that's before bsc but you can get around that by locating it close to the floor. Guess that makes 2 negatives.
I'll mention this now because I thought of it - otherwise I'm likely to forget - when you visit your dad's, take a measurement of the seated ear height at the 2 listening levels. When you start to design your cabinet, you are going to want to set your tweeter height right in the middle of those.
Cheers
No typo on the sub! When you use it as a woofer with a 2nd order filter at 80Hz, you're not really asking it to do very much. In this situation, it's going to be limited by the amount of power it can handle not by excursion limits (I don't actually think it can handle 6000W, the attached pdf doesn't specify) . If you let it play down as low as it will go in a sealed box, it'll hit 115dB with 640W and still stay under xmax. There isn't really much point though because it doesn't go very low sealed - F3 is only 78Hz. Your drivers may or may not do the exact same thing. In other words for a sub, you have to go ported or some similar LF enhancing variation. But for a woofer in a 3-way for movies, it will have more headroom than you are ever going to need. I guess 1 negative to that design though is that if you wanted to play it for music only without a sub, it will be less than satisfactory.
I did however just notice 1 typo. The Peerless ported or sealed needs 100W to hit the 106dB not 10W. And that will mean you'll need more power in your AVR to drive it in a 3-way than just 120W. You'll need 200W for 3dB of headroom and 400W for 6dB. And that's before bsc but you can get around that by locating it close to the floor. Guess that makes 2 negatives.
I'll mention this now because I thought of it - otherwise I'm likely to forget - when you visit your dad's, take a measurement of the seated ear height at the 2 listening levels. When you start to design your cabinet, you are going to want to set your tweeter height right in the middle of those.
Cheers
OK, finally got around to Dad's place and sussed it out.
I will go with the SEAS drivers for the main speakers, dint have the room to use the 10", and a couple of other restraints. I' go with something like a TMWWWW for the FL, FR, the Centre is space limited to a TMWW, and the surrounds I have the space to probably do a TMWW, or TMM, or some variant on that.
His AV receiver isn't powerful enough to run it, so I'll have to make a new one. Will get the boxes built and then figure out the electronics. Possibly if I'm going that way I might look at bi-amping things. Rod Elliot has some great stuff, and projects for that, so I'll have a think on that.
I have some microphone capsules coming in from digikey to make myself some measuring kit, so hopefully in the next month or so I can do some testing of these drivers.
I will go with the SEAS drivers for the main speakers, dint have the room to use the 10", and a couple of other restraints. I' go with something like a TMWWWW for the FL, FR, the Centre is space limited to a TMWW, and the surrounds I have the space to probably do a TMWW, or TMM, or some variant on that.
His AV receiver isn't powerful enough to run it, so I'll have to make a new one. Will get the boxes built and then figure out the electronics. Possibly if I'm going that way I might look at bi-amping things. Rod Elliot has some great stuff, and projects for that, so I'll have a think on that.
I have some microphone capsules coming in from digikey to make myself some measuring kit, so hopefully in the next month or so I can do some testing of these drivers.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.